Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

France’s new high-speed trains

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 239 posts

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#161

Post by kmlx »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #98
jabl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Separating track, rolling stock and station building into three different companies was nuts. Public subsidy plummeted after privatisation, until inadequate maintenance was identified as cause of the Hatfield crash. Then reached never before seen peaks. They're still fiddling around to try and remove the systemic consequences of how it was privatised. Nothing that even slightly resembles the integrated transport Th…

Whether by accident, or design, The Netherlands seem much more able to have transport options that join up. Buses that terminate at the train station, tram routes that serve both, park and ride that serves all. With compatible timetables and ticketing. After reading the piece about Delft cycle routes yesterday, I suspect a reasonable part was by design. I'm sure someone native can point out some major holes, but stil…

> The Netherlands seem much more able to have transport options that join up.

The Netherlands is a very small country, almost half the size of Panama, with a mostly dead flat geography. It is also one of the most densely populated countries in the world.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#162

Post by pbhjpbhj »

makomk wrote: post #144
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

I don't think SNCF have any choice about separating train operations from rail track network maintenance and opening the network up to competition. It's an EU requirement, part of the fourth railway package. That's part of the reason there was talk of the UK not being able to renationalise their railways if we didn't leave the EU - it's increasingly requiring all states to structure their railways more like the UK sy…

>That's part of the reason there was talk of the UK not being able to renationalise their railways //

I thought we did effectively renationalise a portion of the network on the East Coast, and it was better [for users] and profitable in some sense [for the exchequer]?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/26/east-coast-m...

We have a lose-lose system in the UK AFAICT, we have a private system, and we subsidise it from taxation. So private companies get paid dividends, that they didn't earn, from tax money and we still get a fragmented and under-invested system.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#163

Post by stephen_g »

chillacy wrote: post #88
baroffoos wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its part of the US attitude of ignoring modern engineering

Your Intel chips were probably specced out in mils (milli-inches). All the screws are various fractions of an inch. A surprising amount of "modern engineering" uses imperial still. Science at least is all metric.

Actually, in most of the world we use pretty much just metric screws. It’s always bloody annoying to occasionally have to integrate some piece of equipment that we have to specially get in UNC or other imperial screws for.

As for Intel chips, while wafers used to be specified in inches, I beleive they are generally fabricated on 300mm diameter wafers now. All the die sizes I’ve seen doing some quick research appear to be in millimeters (could possibly be approximations of values in mils) but I doubt either millimeters or mils would be useful for actually laying out ASICs - I expect they are mostly using microns and/or nanometers.

PCB design is still mostly in mils in the US, but I’ve heard from colleagues who moved from there of some big companies starting to switch since it’s more convienent for working with China etc. to just use metric.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#164

Post by pbhjpbhj »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #51
jdietrich wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>UK tried this sort of thing and it left everyone with a shittier experience, though they could claim that they successfully privatized the industry -- everyone knows that's a total lie. Passenger volumes have more than doubled since privatisation, after a long period of stagnation under nationalisation. While walk-on fares have increased above the rate of inflation, advance fares are substantially cheaper. The suppo…

That's really not a fair reflection. Privatisation came after nearly 20 years of Tory under investment and far from adequate under several administrations previously. It was, by the time of Major, a very predictable and well-worn trope. What better way to "prove" your lawn needs a private mowing service than barely mowing the lawn for a decade or two? It's quite easy to see why rolling stock was far beyond expected l…

>well if you're being deprived of funds better to keep the train running than the sandwiches fresh //

I'm not sure about this: the sandwiches are an easy daily income; you've got a captive audience, why not make them awesome? In this situation you still have to pay the person making them and selling them, why not make them good?

Can you imagine "I take the train, it has the best sandwiches!". Why can't that be a thing?

>The meals in dining cars managed to stay pretty damn good. //

Presumably because the "fat cats" ate in the dining cars.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#165

Post by pbhjpbhj »

adrianN wrote: post #152
jdietrich wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rail subsidies are highly regressive. The rail network primarily connects cities to cities via relatively affluent suburbs. If you live on a council estate and work in a factory, it's highly unlikely that you have the option of commuting by rail. Very few workers with below-average incomes have the need to travel from Manchester to London for a meeting. Rail travel is inherently more expensive than other modes and al…

Because the alternative to rail is cars. Cars don't scale to the level needed in cities. They also pollute a lot and kill a lot of people in accidents. Everybody benefits from fewer cars on the road.

>Because the alternative to rail is cars. //

Going by air is an alternative to rail for some journeys [eg within UK] too. Edinburgh-London for example.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#166

Post by isostatic »

titanix2 wrote: post #37
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. I think this is mandated by the EU. And it could be a good thing. I'm personally fed up to be treated like a thief when I forgot composting my ticket (which happen because there is not gate to access the rails) or when I could not buy it in the first place (some station doesn't have have vending machines). Also the price lottery for TGV tickets is infuriating (…

> I think this is mandated by the EU.

Not really, the EU is democratic, and generally there's skeptisism in the EU about a liberal rail market.

The Fourth Railway Package explicity allows tracks and trains to be owned by a single holding company. The main point of the package was things like harmonising safety standards across europe (so if you wanted to run a train from london to warsaw you wouldn't need to get safety certification from UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and Poland).

It will mean that a given EU government can't use the rail industry as a way of hiding state aid to people/industries. If SNCF are good, that's fine, they continue. If DB come along and say they can run France's network for half the cost, then DB get the job.

> I'm personally fed up to be treated like a thief when I forgot composting my ticket

That's because you're not traveling with a valid ticket. Try driving off from the petrol station without paying, or boarding a plane without showing a boarding pass.

> Also the price lottery for TGV tickets is infuriating

It's demand led, like planes.

> the commercial strategy of the SNCF is to offer cheap TGV which lacks any confort to kind of punish you not buying the more expensive option.

So buy the more expensive one if you value the comfort.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#167

Post by isostatic »

jdietrich wrote: post #59
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really not a fair reflection. Privatisation came after nearly 20 years of Tory under investment and far from adequate under several administrations previously. It was, by the time of Major, a very predictable and well-worn trope. What better way to "prove" your lawn needs a private mowing service than barely mowing the lawn for a decade or two? It's quite easy to see why rolling stock was far beyond expected l…

Rail subsidies are highly regressive. The rail network primarily connects cities to cities via relatively affluent suburbs. If you live on a council estate and work in a factory, it's highly unlikely that you have the option of commuting by rail. Very few workers with below-average incomes have the need to travel from Manchester to London for a meeting. Rail travel is inherently more expensive than other modes and al…

> Very few workers with below-average incomes have the need to travel from Manchester to London for a meeting

Manchester to London doesn't receive subsidies, it makes a lot of money which is plumbed back into (for example) the south wales valleys lines

South West Rail for all those affulent bankers going into London also makes a profit that's reinvested in say services in Cornwall

> Rail travel is inherently more expensive than other modes and always will be, due to the massive infrastructure cost.

That's not nescersarilly true, I suspect you aren't accounting for externalities like polution, the military cost of oil, etc.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#168

Post by isostatic »

7952 wrote: post #71
jdietrich wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rail subsidies are highly regressive. The rail network primarily connects cities to cities via relatively affluent suburbs. If you live on a council estate and work in a factory, it's highly unlikely that you have the option of commuting by rail. Very few workers with below-average incomes have the need to travel from Manchester to London for a meeting. Rail travel is inherently more expensive than other modes and al…

At least in London rail let's people avoid higher house prices by having a longer commute. But that expands the commuter belt, and raises prices for everyone else. It would be better if people could live closer to work. I think they should use subsidy to make shorter local journeys free or very cheap. Include bus travel also. Ramp up the prices on longer journeys. They could also help out regional airlines to take st…

Generally we all agree that flying when you could use the train is a very bad thing.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#169

Post by isostatic »

conjectures wrote: post #140
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

"It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition." This certainly didn't help in the UK. It's been a shameful saga with multiple failures and no clear rationale. The theory was: privatisation -> ??? -> uber efficiency. Ignoring the fact that the economic theory which usually fills in the ??? requires free entry and exit into the m…

Very few people don't take rail for the fun of it.

People take rail to go somewhere, therefore the market is transport.

The options for say Glasgow to London are

Drive Coach (2 operators (national express, megabus) Fly (2 operators I think) Train (2 operators)

That's 7 different options, each has pros and cons

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#170

Post by rsynnott »

__m wrote: post #99
l9k wrote: post #4

Related, in France as well: Hyperloop TT is developing, in Toulouse, the futuristic hyperloop idea: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/26/hyperloop-firm-unveils-first...

Not exactly something to be proud of. Also "The idea was envisioned by Tesla CEO Elon Musk in a white paper in 2013". No, it was hyped by Musk, the idea dates back to 1904

Yeah, it's kind of ridiculous how much credit Musk gets for this idea. I remember one being a plot point of an old (70s-ish?) Larry Niven novel.
Post reply on HN